Paul Dewar

[Afghanistan, December 16th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the mayor of Kandahar is accusing Canada of handing out contracts to companies that are corrupt, and he is right. The security company that we have hired to protect the Dahla Dam is linked to drug trafficking. Last February, the contractors turned their guns on Canadian security personnel.

The Conservatives talk tough against corruption, but, in fact, the government is paying the protection racket. Afghans are desperate to get rid of corruption. Why are the Conservatives allowing aid money to land in the pockets of corrupt officials? Why do they not crack down on that crime?

[Privilege, December 14th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I want to note that yesterday the parliamentary secretary did acknowledge his comments in the House, and I appreciate that from him.

However, I think it is important for you to check the record as to what he said, because not only did he take responsibility for the words that he had said to the House, and that is to be lauded, but he also suggested that the comments that were made by him at the time he was representing the minister were also reflective of what he thought the government's position was, in other words, what his minister's position was. That was that they had taken into consideration what the department was saying and, therefore, came up with this erroneous position that in fact it was the department that had said no to the application. I think it is important to note that.

Again, I give credit to the parliamentary secretary at the time for acknowledging and taking responsibility for words that he stated in the House.

We are asking that the minister do the same.

At committee, I asked her to clarify her comments and essentially to straighten the record. She was not able to do that.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge as well other evidence that was brought forward which I was not aware of at the time when I was questioning the minister in front of committee. That is the information that you will now have from the order paper question that was submitted by one of my colleagues and I believe an access to information where it does say clearly that the minister's response was based on, and that is the application that was turned down for KAIROS' funding, the information given to her from the department.

You know the contradiction, Mr. Speaker. The record is clear.

You have this piece of evidence. You have the evidence of the member who was formerly the parliamentary secretary who suggests that the department's advice is what was taken into account for the decision. I believe that is very important. It is cogent. I believe you will find there is a need to look into this further.

I do not believe that the minister was clear at all, in fact was not able, when given an opportunity at committee, to straighten the record, and in fact made things a little more obtuse. That is why it is important that we look at this, to have some clean hands take a look at this. I think you will find there is enough here for it to be sent to committee to look at for privilege and contempt.

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister was along this line. With respect to the elections, it is very important for Canada to be absolutely engaged in what the potential solutions are, everything from having a full runoff to looking at an interim proposal of a unity government. However, that of course must to come from the Haitians. We can only try to coordinate it and support it.

On the DART and the military, I am not as sold on them as my colleague is. After the earthquake, there was a role for them. What I am hearing from the NGOs on the ground is that they require resources that can get pushed throughout the country and that the DART may not be the best value for money. With regard to more military, I would like to see political solutions to stabilize things on the ground and I am not sure we need to add more troops to that equation at this time.

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I was hoping that the parliamentary secretary was listening carefully. I said that I hoped that was not the case. He should listen to his minister because the minister was concerned about the outcome of the election and he was fairly up front about his concerns about electoral fraud.

I am not sure what the parliamentary secretary was listening to but I will be clear. What we want to see is Canada being a partner with the Haitian people. What we have seen in the past when it comes to Haiti is that governments, and not necessarily just Canadian governments but governments internationally back in the history of France and the United States, have used Haiti.

Members know the history. This is a country that threw off the shackles of slavery. It is fiercely independent. It does not need to be told how to run its affairs. It needs no lessons from us. What it needs is partnership and solidarity. That was my point and that is my point for the parliamentary secretary.

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Outremont.

Why are we here tonight? To start with, we are here to discuss Canada's role in Haiti after the devastating earthquake that reduced much of its capital, Port-au-Prince, to rubble and displaced many Haitians. To give members an idea, this was the worst earthquake in the region in more than 200 years. The estimated total cost of the disaster was between $7.2 billion and $13.2 billion, based on a death toll of anywhere from 200,000 to 250,000 people. In fact, there have been numbers later revised up to 300,000 people. Crushed buildings from the January earthquake still spill out onto the sidewalks. There is a cholera epidemic that has killed more than 1,000 people and stoked violent demonstrations against peacekeepers, and now, on top of all that, an election process that has thrown the country into even further destabilization.

Canadians promised to provide long-term assistance to the Haitian people. Canadians gave generously in order to help the country get back on its feet quickly. The aftermath of the earthquake is now being exacerbated by a cholera epidemic and a questionable electoral process. After the elections, there is the risk of an even greater destabilization of Haiti.

There are three parts to this problem. In the short term, we need to save the lives of those who are threatened by cholera. In the medium term, we need to help rebuild basic infrastructure in Haiti. In the long term, we need to focus on rebuilding and strengthening democratic institutions in Haiti with Haitians and not by others.

What does that mean to the current post-election crisis? Canada should engage the political leadership of Haiti to work toward common goals and to stabilize the political situation in Haiti so that the basic fundamental needs of Haitians can be met immediately.

The cholera crisis is horrific. According to the United Nations, 400,000 people might catch it over the next year.

According to Canadian organizations on the ground, the most immediate needs are as follows: a good campaign to educate the people and prevent contagion; the prompt distribution of water purification tablets and soap; the establishment of cholera treatment centres and the training of those who work in them; and safe and respectful transportation of the dead and the holding of suitable funerals.

In the medium term, we need to help Haiti rebuild its basic infrastructure.

In the medium term, we must get on with the construction of housing for the 1.6 million displaced Haitians living in precarious conditions in the camps. It is important that a drinking water system be established.

In the long term, we must focus on the institutions of the country and, above all, on civil society, justice and the participation of women. Never again must the democratic ambitions of Haitians be held back by an electoral process that limits participation and allows abuse to run rampant.

In the long term, we should help rebuild and strengthen Haiti's democratic institutions. No longer should Haitians' democratic ambitions be dampened by an electoral process that limits participation and is open to abuse.

We made a commitment to Haiti, not just after last year's earthquake but before that. What we need to be seized with right now is to ensure the aid and the support that we provide to Haiti is not done to them but is done with them in the spirit of solidarity. What is of concern to many is that for Haitians right now, what they see is a crisis of cholera, an election that is not accepted by many and a world community that seems to be unsure of what to do next.

It is clear what we must do. We must be with the Haitians. We must be absolutely certain that their priorities are met immediately. If this is just about gamesmanship, if this is just about trying to put our guy in power, then it will fail miserably.

I will urge the government, as will many in our party, to be vigilant as to what our goal is in Haiti. It is to support the people, and we must engage our diaspora community to do that. We have an untapped resource with people of the diaspora community in Montreal, Ottawa and throughout the country. They are clear about what they want to see. They want to see Canada take a leadership role to provide the stability that is necessary so we can get on with the work, in the short term, of saving lives; in the medium term, of helping rebuild the critical infrastructure that is required, not only from the earthquake but before that; and, in the long term, that we focus our energies and our support on rebuilding civil society so that it will be a country that will be able to have a democratic election, that will no longer be open to abuse, that will have important institutions and that will be able to withstand the conflicts that can occur.

Those are the things that we need to see. We hope our government is playing a leadership role and that it is doing what we have done best in Canada, which is playing an honest broker role to find the pathway to solutions. If Canada seizes that opportunity, not only will it have the full support of our party but I am sure of all Canadians. Most important, if we are able to provide that time-honoured Canadian value of finding that pathway, then we will have the support and the welcome of the Haitian people.

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member from the Bloc Québécois.

There is a great deal of discussion about the election results, but the debate here is not enough to resolve the situation, particularly the role of the community on the ground in planning the reconstruction of Haiti.

Is Canada providing enough support to Haitian civil society?

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said that everyone should buy into a solution. That is what we want to see from the international community on the ground in Haiti.

To that point there is a real concern that if we do not see an agreed upon process for the next step in the election process, there will be continued violence. I know that all issues cannot be put on the table tonight, but I would hope that Canada is using its influence working with others in the international community to look at all solutions. One that some have talked about is to get the leaders to agree to some form of interim government to get on with the real concerns that people have with the cholera epidemic and the reconstruction. That would provide some stability first and then there could be talk about elections after.

I am wondering if all of those options are being talked about. I am not asking the minister to tell us exactly what the conversations are, but I just want to know that Canada is involved in these kinds of conversations.

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is important that we focus on gender. As Haitians deal with the crisis, particularly after the elections and the violence, it is important that they play a leadership role as well as receive help. Does she have any comments on that?

The government, after a couple of years of being asked, has put forward an action plan on UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the subsequent UN Security Council Resolution 1820. It calls for women to be central when dealing with post-conflict tenuous situations. Does she have an idea of how that resolution 1325 action plan can be put in place? Would this not be a good opportunity for the government to put its plan into action?

[Situation in Haiti, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I obviously listened with interest to the member's intervention and what he was hoping would happen. Certainly, having this debate tonight is a good opportunity to discuss different ideas.

It is incredibly important right now to look at the priorities, and the priority right now is to save lives. Clearly, the cholera epidemic is having a huge impact. More than 1,000 people have lost their lives. We still have issues around prevention, et cetera, from the cholera epidemic.

I am wondering if the hon. member would like to express his concern about the sequence in which we deal with this problem. Of course, the post-election violence has exacerbated the problem, but I am hearing from NGOs who were on the ground over the weekend that they cannot get out to help the people who need help. So how do we do that in this period before whatever will happen in terms of a run-off or recount or whatever?

[Afghanistan, December 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we would like to see an open debate.

However, the Conservatives and the Liberals claim that in Afghanistan, one of the roles is to provide security for development, but most Canadians would be surprised to hear exactly how we are providing that security. The Dahla Dam, Canada's largest development project in Afghanistan, is being entrusted to a private security firm with drug trafficking ties, a firm that the U.S. has blacklisted.

Will the government explain why Canada's precious aid dollars are actually going into the pockets of drug traffickers?